imavillan Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 hour ago, CVByrne said: I feel the soft salary cap is the real path forward in the future. To keep the gap in spending between top and bottom clubs in the league in a range that keeps competition. The PL product needs this. I think we benefit from FFP because we're one of the big clubs in terms of history fan base etc.. we can close the gap on the clubs like Chelsea and Spurs faster than they can grow their own revenue. I feel Heck appointment is to bring a level of brand and commercial revenue that exists in US Sports and is not tapped by the PL teams. Who go for big commercial partnership routes. I think there's still huge potential in the US market which is growing and we can tap that. So keeping financial constraints makes clubs require to grow the way we are doing. The way a Brighton have, Brentford etc.. Brighton and Brentford, grow to what? Mid table security, an occasional top 7 finish? Brentford and Brighton are hardly regular challengers for anything are they? They have zero chance of winning the league. and then there's the cherry picking of the players from the big clubs so they have to start again. Growth for these clubs and the majority in the Prem is starting a season when you know you will not be involved in a relegation scrap. Selling players for profit to the big clubs to keep the books in order. Modern day football is not competitive in any league. Every league has it's 'big clubs' the rest are just feeder clubs and have the occasional cup run or top 6 finish. The so called big clubs will not be happy until they have there closed shop Super League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 3 hours ago, viivvaa66 said: If all financial rules are gone from PL, I would expect clubs will be divided into 3 tiers. Tier 1: State sponsored clubs, that do not care about profitability, only about PR and sports washing. Tier 2: Rich owners, that have money to spend, but in the end of the day will try to make a profit. Tier 3: Poor owners, that will run the club with the revenue that the club is generating. If this happened tier 1 clubs will run away with the league every season, making PL less interesting. This would negatively impact TV deals and sponsorship contracts, especially for non tier 1 clubs. In the end the PL will be as interesting as the French League. They do anyway, one of them has won 6 of the last 7 league titles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 hour ago, Follyfoot said: Man City owners are worth 23 billion I think, our three sets of owners are worth 17 / 18 billion. Surely that’s not too much of a gap to compete? Obviously, Newcastle is a different egg. City's owners don't care how much they spend, i'd imagine ours do. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 hours ago, ThunderPower_14 said: I agree with the soft salary cap and a luxury tax. It doesn't matter if Man City can spend 150mil on a transfer if their wage bill is capped to the point where they can't attract a 150mil player without having to pay the rest of the teams in the league an exorbitant amount. They can, the player would just get lucrative sponsorship deals outside of football to sign for certain clubs. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 10 hours ago, Villa_Vids said: Totally Disagree. We will be very competitive ourselves. Maybe it will open the league up more? It really wont. The league is already broken look at the shambolic relegation battle and will only get worse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villa_Vids Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 minutes ago, Zatman said: It really wont. The league is already broken look at the shambolic relegation battle and will only get worse Allowing ambitious clubs to invest will imo. FFP rich clubs like Spurs and Utd are not competing with the rules stack in their favour. Move aside, Villa and Newcastle will take your spot. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 minute ago, Villa_Vids said: Allowing ambitious clubs to invest will imo. FFP rich clubs like Spurs and Utd are not competing with the rules stack in their favour. Move aside, Villa and Newcastle will take your spot. Will bankrupt clubs chasing the dream more than anything. Considering we were on the brink and got lucky we really should not be playing with fire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Rightdm00 Posted June 6 Popular Post Share Posted June 6 10 hours ago, Villa_Vids said: Totally Disagree. We will be very competitive ourselves. Maybe it will open the league up more? I love our owners as well but they have zero desire or ability to compete against state funded owners. Newcastle is owned by the PIF which has a value of nearly a trillion dollars. A trillion. Our owners entire wealth is just a river stone in a lake compared to the PIF. If you exclude the PIF and just take the networth of Newcastle's chairman alone, Yasir Al-Rumayyan, he is worth 10x as much as NSWE. Without FFP Newcastle would have already made Emiliano Martinez the world's first £100 million GK transfer. They would have bought Ollie Watkins, gave him 300k p/w and sat him on the bench behind Isak. FFP is the main reason the league has become more competitive, otherwise the top clubs would have snuffed out our top 4 challenge before it ever got off the ground. The only reason City has been so dominant is due to them completely ignoring the rules of FFP, hence the 115 charges they are currently facing. I fully believe if they had respected FFP, no way they build the squad they have now. FFP needs fixing, but spending caps are a proven way of increasing the competition level within a league. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 minutes ago, Rightdm00 said: I love our owners as well but they have zero desire or ability to compete against state funded owners. Newcastle is owned by the PIF which has a value of nearly a trillion dollars. A trillion. Our owners entire wealth is just a river stone in a lake compared to the PIF. If you exclude the PIF and just take the networth of Newcastle's chairman alone, Yasir Al-Rumayyan, he is worth 10x as much as NSWE. Without FFP Newcastle would have already made Emiliano Martinez the world's first £100 million GK transfer. They would have bought Ollie Watkins, gave him 300k p/w and sat him on the bench behind Isak. FFP is the main reason the league has become more competitive, otherwise the top clubs would have snuffed out our top 4 challenge before it ever got off the ground. The only reason City has been so dominant is due to them completely ignoring the rules of FFP, hence the 115 charges they are currently facing. I fully believe if they had respected FFP, no way they build the squad they have now. FFP needs fixing, but spending caps are a proven way of increasing the competition level within a league. Brilliant post. However, for me, it just highlights the fact that it's state ownership that is the issue, more so than the free spending potential (which would also not be ideal for competitiveness). Individuals with massive net worths are nothing compared with oil funded state governments, but could still prevent a competitive league if certain individuals got involved. Squad size caps and a total salary limits would prevent City doing what they have done. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Scorpio Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 10 hours ago, Villa_Vids said: Totally Disagree. We will be very competitive ourselves. Maybe it will open the league up more? You think we can match what those teams are willing to spend?. Seriously? They have unlimited wealth. We won't be doing anything like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villa_Vids Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Just now, Hank Scorpio said: You think we can match what those teams are willing to spend?. Seriously? They have unlimited wealth. We won't be doing anything like that. Strategy is more important than money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Scorpio Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 2 hours ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said: Yeah we've also got backing from the likes of Aitoros, there is no reasons other huge investors wouldn't be interested in pumping money into us with relaxed rules as well. We are prime and healthy property both on and off the pitch as far as a football business goes imo. The 2 owners and Aitoros won't he spending the entirety of their wealth on villa. That's the only way we go toe to to with nation state clubs. So we can't and won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Scorpio Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 minute ago, Villa_Vids said: Strategy is more important than money. But money beats strategy in football. If s team and a player has a straight choice between a team offering more money in transfer fees, and wages 9 times out of ten they get the player. So that's why we won't win against a man city or Newcastle if unlimited spend is allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 3 hours ago, imavillan said: Brighton and Brentford, grow to what? Mid table security, an occasional top 7 finish? Brentford and Brighton are hardly regular challengers for anything are they? They have zero chance of winning the league. and then there's the cherry picking of the players from the big clubs so they have to start again. Growth for these clubs and the majority in the Prem is starting a season when you know you will not be involved in a relegation scrap. Selling players for profit to the big clubs to keep the books in order. Modern day football is not competitive in any league. Every league has it's 'big clubs' the rest are just feeder clubs and have the occasional cup run or top 6 finish. The so called big clubs will not be happy until they have there closed shop Super League. Your narrow confines of football are about who challenges for the Premier League. You realise there are hundreds of football clubs in England pyramid. The determination of success is not based in winning the PL for almost all football clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villa_Vids Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 41 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said: But money beats strategy in football. If s team and a player has a straight choice between a team offering more money in transfer fees, and wages 9 times out of ten they get the player. So that's why we won't win against a man city or Newcastle if unlimited spend is allowed. City/Newcastle can't buy and buy players. Unlimited spending isn't allowed and won't be. Utd have spent similar to City over the same period and have not won one league title. City have developed a strategy not just throwing money about. Utd now are hiring Citeh staff. NSWE believe they can "challenge" them better by an increase in our funding capacity, thus making us more competitive. Besides our strategy has shown we have trumped those who have outspent us and are "FFP rich". Aspiring clubs are not being supported towards making the league more competitive. NSWE are determined and have proven they will succeed within these restrictive rules. Sponsorship rules being relaxed will help the club enormously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duke313 Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 I've figured out a way to fix our PSR issues, it's really quite simple. We sell Omar Kedr back to ZED FC for £100m... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentfordnylons Posted June 6 Visiting Supporter Share Posted June 6 4 hours ago, imavillan said: Brighton and Brentford, grow to what? Mid table security, an occasional top 7 finish? Brentford and Brighton are hardly regular challengers for anything are they? They have zero chance of winning the league. and then there's the cherry picking of the players from the big clubs so they have to start again. Growth for these clubs and the majority in the Prem is starting a season when you know you will not be involved in a relegation scrap. Selling players for profit to the big clubs to keep the books in order. Modern day football is not competitive in any league. Every league has it's 'big clubs' the rest are just feeder clubs and have the occasional cup run or top 6 finish. The so called big clubs will not be happy until they have there closed shop Super League. Agree with this post and the main reason why I hate the premier league.Mid table security with an occasional top 7 finish is our ambition and not blaming anyone at the club but that’s how it is for small clubs in the big boys league.The championship is the best place for clubs like ours with the occasional promotions to top up the cash. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinebro Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Just sell all our best players to the traditional top 6 clubs then and I'm sure Premier League will be very happy! For real though it's so obvious the top 6 has been broken up and they're not having it. If it wasn't corrupt Man City would have been a championship club now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboyangel Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 1 hour ago, duke313 said: I've figured out a way to fix our PSR issues, it's really quite simple. We sell Omar Kedr back to ZED FC for £100m... You jest, but this is what Man City are arguing for (amongst making up as many overpriced sponsorship deals from their subsidiary companies as they feel fit to) and why they’re being discriminated against by the PL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabby Posted June 6 Share Posted June 6 Increasing losses to 135 we proposed as been knocked back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts